Charitable giving is not a modern invention of the industrialized world. It is a natural behavior as old as humankind. In this presentation, Professor James reviews scientific research from a range of disciplines to uncover the natural origins of philanthropy and translates these scientific concepts into effective fundraising strategies. Be prepared to see how theory and science can produce powerful, practical, real-world fundraising success.
call girls in moti bagh DELHI 🔝 >༒9540349809 🔝 genuine Escort Service 🔝✔️✔️
Natural philanthropy: How the natural origins of donor motivations drive powerful fundraising
1. Natural Philanthropy
How the
natural
origins of
donor
motivations
drive
powerful
fundraising
Professor Russell James III
Texas Tech University
complete scientific journal article available at
https://www.nature.com/articles/palcomms201750
3. How do you raise major gifts?
The standard answer…
4. How do you raise major gifts?
The standard answer…
Math
5. How do you raise major gifts?
The standard answer…
MathA major gift can be
closed after 9 meaningful
contacts across 6 months
to two years. With a 1/3
ask success rate getting 6
new major gifts requires
3 x 9 x 6 = 162
meaningful contacts.
6. How do you raise major gifts?
The standard answer…
MathOK, but the math works
for some projects, some
fundraisers, and some
donors but not others.
7. How do you raise major gifts?
The standard answer…
MathOK, but the math works
for some projects, some
fundraisers, and some
donors but not others.
Why?
8. No/low quality ask +
no relationship
no gifts
Need Quality Ask + Quality Relationship
(with organization/cause/other supporters)
Quality ask + no/low
quality relationship
minor gifts
No/low quality ask +
quality relationship
minor gifts
Quality ask +
quality relationship
major gifts
9. But, what how do we
define, understand, and
achieve quality asks and
relationships?
Need Quality Ask + Quality Relationship
(with organization/cause/other supporters)
10. But, what how do we
define, understand, and
achieve quality asks and
relationships?
Need Quality Ask + Quality Relationship
(with organization/cause/other supporters)
By exploring the natural origins of
philanthropy
11. “This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning
back. You take the blue pill—the story ends, you wake up
in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe.
You take the red pill—you stay in Wonderland, and I show
you how deep the rabbit hole goes.”
12. 1. Review the natural philanthropy model
2. Natural origins and experimental results
underlying the model
3. Using natural philanthropy to build
quality relationships and asks
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
13. We will get to specific do’s and don’ts
but, first, we
start with theory
17. • Can fit new or special
circumstances
• Works even where results
aren’t instant
• Allows you to build your
own applications
Theory based strategies
are more flexible than a
list of do’s and don’ts
18. A model of charitable decisions:
Let’s start simple
20. Agree to make a gift
Refuse to make a gift
Avoid the giving decision Avoid
Yes
No
21. Agree to make a gift
Refuse to make a gift
Avoid the giving decision Avoid
Yes
No
You have to ask
University alumni whose names appeared
earlier in the alphabet were more likely to
be called with a phone solicitation and,
consequently, were more likely to make
gifts to the university
Meer, J., and H. S. Rosen. 2011. “The ABCs of Charitable Solicitation.” Journal of Public Economics, 95 (5): 363-371.
31. Tangibility
In experiments,
presenting giving and
sharing opportunities in
naturalistic, concrete,
visualizable forms, such
as a story or narrative,
increases emotional
helping or reciprocity
responses
Dickert, S., and P. Slovic. 2009. “Attentional
Mechanisms in the Generation of Sympathy.”
Judgment and Decision Making, 4 (4): 297-306.
Schank, Roger C., and R. P. Abelson. 1995.
“Knowledge and Memory: The Real Story.” In:
Robert S. Wyer, Jr (ed) Knowledge and Memory:
The Real Story. Hillsdale, NJ. Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates. 1-85.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
NoBehavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
32. With each factor there is
• a surface version, critical for smaller gifts
• a deeper version, critical for major gifts
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
33. Direct altruism
Giving to support a
beneficiary
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
34. Code altruism
Giving to support a
code of behavior or
set of values
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
35. Transactional reciprocity
The conditional transfer of
resources
Can come from recipients,
organizations representing
recipients, government, other
supporters, or creation of a
shared good used by the donor
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
36. Friend/family reciprocity
A mutual expectation of, to
some degree, unconditional aid
Relationship vs. quid pro quo
with recipients, organizations,
or other supporters
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
37. Acts of direct or code
altruism can also signal
to observers that the
donor is a high quality
partner for future
reciprocity relationships
by signaling wealth or
shared support of
beneficiaries and
important behavioral
codes
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
38. Typical gifts come
from disposable
income
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Income
39. Typical gifts come
from disposable
income
Major gifts come
from wealth
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
40. 1. Review the natural philanthropy model
2. Natural origins and experimental results
underlying the model
3. Using natural philanthropy to build quality
relationships and asks
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
41. c < rb
where c is the cost to
the donor, b is the
benefit to the recipient,
and r is the genetic
similarity between the
donor and recipient
r=1/2
r=0
r=1/6
r=1/3
Hamilton (1964) proposed direct altruistic transfers
improve inclusive genetic fitness when
Hamilton, W. D. (1964) The Genetical Evolution of Social
Behaviour. II. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 7 (1): 17-52.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
42. Transfers are preferred
when the recipient is
relatively needy, as this
indicates high recipient
benefit, b, relative to
donor cost, c
c < rb
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
43. But gifts motivated by
cheap impact
[high recipient benefit, b,
relative to donor cost, c]
will be smaller because
the need is easily met
c < rb
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
44. Motivation from recipient similarity, r, is not limited to
small gifts. Similarity in recipient location, behavior,
personality, and physical appearance increases altruistic
sharing (and also predicts genetic similarity).
c < rbRushton, J. P. 1989. “Genetic Similarity, Human Altruism, and
Group Selection.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12: 503-559.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
45. But, the power of similarity
goes beyond genetic factors.
People are more willing to
comply with a request when
the requester shares a
birthday, a first name, or
fingerprint similarities
Burger, J. M., Messian, N., Patel, S., del Prado, A., and Anderson, C. 2004.
“What a Coincidence! The Effects of Incidental Similarity on Compliance.”
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30 (1): 35-43.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
46. University alumni are
more likely to give to a
student solicitor who
shares a similar field
of study or first letter
of the first name
Bekkers, R. 2010. “George Gives to Geology Jane: The Name Letter
Effect and Incidental Similarity Cues in Fundraising.” International
Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 15 (2): 172-180.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
47. r=1/2
r=0
r=1/6
r=1/3
An individual may also benefit others through support of a code
of behavior that improves group outcomes
Don’t kill
Gintis, H. 2003. “The Hitchhiker's Guide to Altruism: Gene-Culture Coevolution, and The Internalization of Norms.” Journal of Theoretical Biology, 220 (4): 407-418.
Gintis, H. (2000) Strong Reciprocity and Human Sociality. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 206 (2): 169-179.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
48. Code support may
be expressed by
costly rewarding
of code followers,
costly punishment
of code violators,
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
Code
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
49. and personally
internalizing or
causing others
to internalize a
code
(i.e., follow the
code in the
absence of
punishment or
reward)
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
Code
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
50. Reminders can increase
attention to supporting a code
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
Code
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
51. Simply reminding people of the
concept of love by incidentally
displaying the word increases
charitable donations
Guéguen, N., and L. Lamy. 2011. “The Effect of the Word
‘Love’ on Compliance to a Request for Humanitarian Aid: An
Evaluation in A Field Setting.” Social Influence, 6 (4): 249-258.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
Code
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
52. Priming participants with
religious words leads to
increased generosity in
experimental games
Shariff, A. F., and A. Norenzayan. 2007. “God Is
Watching You Priming God Concepts Increases
Prosocial Behavior in an Anonymous Economic
Game.” Psychological Science, 18 (9): 803-809.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
Code
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
54. Transactional reciprocity
The conditional transfer of resources
r=1/2
r=0
r=1/6
r=1/3
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Purely transactional
gifts generate
smaller net
transfers as they
are viewed from a
market/exchange
mindset
55. Friend/family
reciprocity
A mutual
expectation of, to
some degree,
unconditional aid r=1/2
r=0
r=1/6
r=1/3
As
need
arises
As
need
arises
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
56. In a natural context, mutual “friendship insurance” that
generates transactionally unjustified support in a crisis can be
more important to survival than simple exchange transactions
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
57. Survival impact from mutual friendship insurance
(transactionally unjustified support during crisis or social
conflict) has been documented in chimpanzees…
Fraser, O.N., G. Schino, and F. Aureli. 2008. “Components of
Relationship Quality in Chimpanzees.” Ethology 114: 834-843.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
58. …macaques…
Massen, J. J. M. 2010. “'Friendship' in Macaques. Economics
and Emotions.” PhD thesis, Utrecht University, Utrecht
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
59. …and even ravens
Fraser, O.N. and T. Bugnyar. 2010. “The Quality of Social
Relationships in Ravens.” Animal Behavior 79: 927-933.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
60. “For hunter-gatherers, illness,
injury, bad luck in foraging, or the
inability to resist an attack by
social antagonists would all have
been frequent reversals of fortune
with a major selective impact. The
ability to attract assistance during
such threatening reversals in
welfare, where the absence of
help might be deadly” would have
been critical to survival.
Tooby, J., and L. Cosmides. 1996. “Friendship and the Banker's
Paradox: Other Pathways to The Evolution of Adaptations for
Altruism.” Proceedings of the British Academy, 88: p.132.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
61. Friendship insurance “may well have had far more significant
selective consequences than the ability to cultivate social
exchange relationships that promote marginal increases in
returns during times when one is healthy, safe, and well-fed”
Tooby, J., and L. Cosmides. 1996. “Friendship and the Banker's Paradox: Other Pathways to The Evolution of Adaptations for Altruism.” Proceedings of the British Academy, 88: p.132.
Reciprocity
Friend/Family Transactional
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Reciprocity
>
62. Although receiving the benefits
of friendship insurance was
critical, fulfilling the obligations
was costly
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
65. Receiving mutual friendship
insurance is critical,
but providing it is costly
The key survival
challenge: Determining
and demonstrating – in
advance – the ability
and willingness to help
in a crisis
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
66. 1. Review the natural philanthropy model
2. Natural origins and experimental results
underlying the model
3. Using natural philanthropy to build
quality relationships and asks
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
67. Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
No/low quality ask +
no relationship
no gifts
Using natural philanthropy to understand the
origins of a quality ask
Quality ask + no/low
quality relationship
minor gifts
No/low quality ask +
quality relationship
minor gifts
Quality ask +
quality relationship
major gifts
68. Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Understanding the gift
as a demonstration of
friendship insurance
reliability, i.e., the ability
and willingness to
protect my in-group
members and values
Understanding the
relationship as an
expectation of
friendship insurance
reliability, transactionally
unjustified support
when needed
69. Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero
story
70. A core challenge is to
separate true friends,
who will actually
deliver sufficient help
in a crisis,
Tooby, J., and L. Cosmides. 1996. “Friendship and the
Banker's Paradox: Other Pathways to The Evolution of
Adaptations for Altruism.” Proceedings of the British
Academy, 88: 119-143.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
71. from fair weather friends, who
appear helpful in mundane
circumstances but fail to
deliver in a crisis
Tooby, J., and L.
Cosmides. 1996.
“Friendship and the
Banker's Paradox:
Other Pathways to
The Evolution of
Adaptations for
Altruism.”
Proceedings of the
British Academy, 88:
119-143.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
72. This is
problematic
in safe, stable
modern
environments
where crises
that could
resolve this
doubt may be
rare
Tooby, J., and L. Cosmides. 1996. “Friendship and
the Banker's Paradox: Other Pathways to The
Evolution of Adaptations for Altruism.”
Proceedings of the British Academy, 88: 119-143.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
73. Demonstrating
altruistic
behavior in
extreme or
crisis scenarios
would thus be
particularly
important
signals
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
74. 1. Advance
the donor
hero story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
One study found that although
women generally prefer altruists for
friendships and long-term
relationships they
more strongly prefer those
exhibiting heroic acts of altruism
Kelly, S., and R. I. M. Dunbar. 2001. “Who Dares, Wins: Heroism Versus
Altruism in Women's Mate Choice.” Human Nature, 12: 89-105.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
75. 1. Advance
the donor
hero story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Another study
found that
reading a
romantic scenario
significantly
increased men’s
subsequent
willingness to
engage in heroic,
but not mundane,
altruism Griskevicius, V., J. M. Tybur, J. M. Sundie, R. B. Cialdini, G. F. Miller, and D. T. Kenrick. 2007. “Blatant
Benevolence and Conspicuous Consumption: When Romantic Motives Elicit Strategic Costly Signals.”
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93 (1): 85.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
76. 1. Advance
the donor
hero story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Examples of charitable
fundraising efforts requiring
extended fasting, plunging into
cold water, or walking on
burning coals may reflect this
preference for heroic giving
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
77. 1. Advance
the donor
hero story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
One study found that people
were willing to donate more if
informed that making the
donation would require
substantial pain or effort such as
running five miles or enduring a
painful “cold-pressor”
[ice bucket] task
Olivola, C. Y., and E. Shafir. 2013. “The Martyrdom Effect:
When Pain and Effort Increase Prosocial Contributions.”
Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 26 (1): 91-105.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
78. 1. Advance
the donor
hero story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
A “hero” need not do extreme physical acts, but is any
sacrificial protector of group members or ideals
meriting lasting social approval
Franco, Z. E., Blau, K. and Zimbardo, P. G. (2011). Heroism: A Conceptual Analysis and
Differentiation between Heroic Action and Altruism. Review of General Psychology, 15(2): 99.
• Protecting group members is
direct altruism
• Protecting group ideals is code
altruism
• Social norms establish social
approval required for reciprocity
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Behavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
79. 1. Advance
the donor
hero story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Advancing the donor
hero story rather
than the donor hero
calculation, reflects
the importance of
more tangible forms
of framing
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Behavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
80. 1. Advance
the donor
hero story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Behavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
From a rational
accounting
perspective, which
dollars are spent on
which items is
irrelevant when
total project cost
is fixed
Money is fungible
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
81. 1. Advance
the donor
hero story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Behavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Gneezy, U., E. A. Keenan, and A. Gneezy. 2014. “Avoiding Overhead Aversion in Charity.”
Science, 346 (6209): 632-635.;
Portillo, J. E., & Stinn, J. (2018). Overhead aversion: Do some types of overhead matter more
than others?. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 72, 40-50.
But which makes the
better donor hero story?
Building a well for a needy village
costs 50% for construction and 50%
for overhead and administration.
Your gift will be used…
1. For construction only
[highest donations]
2. For the project overall [middle]
3. For overhead and
administration only [lowest]
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
82. 1. Advance
the donor
hero story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Behavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Donors are more likely to
give, and give more, if
their particular gift is
made at or near the
fundraising goal
completion,
even when, in the
absence of their gift,
someone else would
have made the goal
completion giftCryder, C. E., G. Loewenstein, and H. Seltman. 2013. “Goal Gradient in Helping Behavior.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49 (6): 1078-1083.
Klinowski, D., N. Argo, and T. Krishnamurti. 2015. “The Completion Effect in Charitable Crowdfunding.” http://pitt.edu/~djk59/completion_kak.pdf
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
83. 1. Advance
the donor
hero story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Behavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Emphasizing donor heroism
• Expressing gratitude in a way
that confirms the heroic nature
of the gift [ex: Donor impact booklet]
• Sharing heroically-framed
stories of others who have
made similar gifts
• Constructing giving
opportunities that advance the
donor hero story
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
84. 1. Advance
the donor
hero story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
“Advancing” rather than
“creating” the donor hero
story means that the gift
should fit within the
donor’s existing life
narrative
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Behavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
85. 1. Advance
the donor
hero story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
1. The hero goes forth
2. Struggles with a gatekeeper, enters a
horrible place, undergoes an ordeal
3. Then gains reward
4. And returns to his place of beginning
5. With a gift to improve his world
Campbell, J. (1949),
The Hero with a
Thousand Faces.
New York: Pantheon.
pp. 245-246
Ex: a successful entrepreneur giving to her alma
mater, a cancer survivor giving to cancer research
Joseph Campbell’s “monomyth”
universal hero story
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Behavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
86. 1. Advance
the donor
hero story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Behavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Spoiler alert: Every major epic movie ever
1. The hero goes forth
2. Struggles with a
gatekeeper, enters
a horrible place,
undergoes an
ordeal
3. Then gains reward
4. And returns to his
place of beginning
5. With a gift to
improve his world
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
87. 1. Advance
the donor
hero story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Behavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
But, where is the fundraiser in the movie?
1. The hero goes forth
2. Struggles with a
gatekeeper, enters
a horrible place,
undergoes an
ordeal
3. Then gains reward
4. And returns to his
place of beginning
5. With a gift to
improve his world
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
88. 1. Advance
the donor
hero story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Behavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
The sage challenges with a choice
Obi-Wan: You must
learn the ways of the
Force, if you're to come
with me to Alderaan.
Luke: Alderaan? I'm not
going to Alderaan, I've
gotta get home, it's
late, I'm in for it as it is!
Obi-Wan: I need your
help, Luke. She needs
your help.
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
89. 1. Advance
the donor
hero story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Behavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
The sage challenges with a choice
Are you giving someone
the opportunity to be
part of something
bigger than
themselves?
Understanding this role
should impact how you
feel about confidently
asking big vs.
apologetically asking
small.
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
90. Death reminders (e.g., planned giving and aging)
increase attraction to personal heroism
H
Pursuit of symbolic immortality: something
reflecting the person’s life story (community
and values) will live beyond them
Death reminders increase self-reported
similarity with a hero; describing one’s own
hero (but not another’s) reduces death-
related thoughts as does reading of a
heroic act but only when the hero shared
the participant’s birthdate
McCabe, S., Carpenter, R. W., & Arndt, J. (2016). The role of mortality awareness in hero
identification. Self and Identity, 15(6), 707-726.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Behavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
91. 1. Advance
the donor
hero story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
In
neuroimaging
experiments, as
“visualized
autobiography”
brain activity
increased, so
did the
willingness to
make a gift to
charity in a will
In qualitative
interviews with
bequest donors
“when discussing
which charities
they had chosen
to remember,
there was a clear
link with the life
narratives of many
respondents”
Routley, C.J. (2011) Leaving a charitable legacy: Social
influence, the self and symbolic immortality. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of the West of England,
Bristol. p. 220
James, R. N., III & O’Boyle, M. W. (2014). Charitable
estate planning as visualized autobiography: An fMRI
study of its neural correlates. Nonprofit and
Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 43(2), 355-373
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Behavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
92. 1. Advance
the donor
hero story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Are the donors just an
ATM for the heroic
administrators?
Are the administrators
just following the heroic
donor’s orders?
Who is the hero?
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Behavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
93. Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Share the
donor hero
story
94. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Reciprocity benefits can come directly from the
charity or, if the gift is publicized, can come from
other observers
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
95. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Accordingly,
increasing the
public visibility
of a gift
usually
increases
giving
behavior
Andreoni, J., and R. Petrie. 2004. “Public
Goods Experiments Without Confidentiality:
A Glimpse into Fund-Raising.” Journal of
Public Economics, 88 (7): 1605-1623.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
96. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
96
Charitable giving generated greater
activation in brain reward centers (ventral
striatum) when observers were present
Izuma, K., Saito, D. N., & Sadato, N. (2010). Processing of the
Incentive for Social Approval in the Ventral Striatum during Charitable
Donation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22 (4), 621-631.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
97. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Donations also increase with
reminders that increase only the
feeling of being observed, such
as printing eye spots on an
appeal letter response device.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Krupka, E. L., and R. T. Croson. 2016. “The Differential Impact of Social Norms Cues on
Charitable Contributions.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 128: 149-158.
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
98. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Two groups with two computer backgrounds. Each person
receives a payment and is asked: Do you want to share any of it
with another (anonymous) participant?
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
99. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidanceSharing
55%
Not
Sharing
45%
Normal
Screen
Sharing
88%
Not
Sharing
12%
Eyes Screen
K. J. Haley
(UCLA), D.M.T.
Fessler (UCLA).
2005. Nobody’s
watching?
Subtle cues
affect
generosity in an
anonymous
economic
game. Evolution
and Human
Behavior, 26,
245–256
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
100. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Donors give more when placed in a “leadership”
position of publicly giving prior to (rather than after)
other donors’ decisions
Reinstein, D., and G. Riener. 2012. “Reputation and Influence in Charitable
Giving: An experiment.” Theory and Decision, 72 (2): 221-243.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
101. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
The importance of
publicity
Altruism may
display qualities
important in a
future
transactional or
friendship/family
reciprocity partner
(resources, values,
similarity, reliability
in a crisis)
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
102. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
When experimental participants
choose their partner for a joint
profit making game, the most
generous participants were the
most frequently chosen
Hardy, C. L., and M. Van Vugt. 2006. “Nice Guys Finish First: The
Competitive Altruism Hypothesis.” Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 32 (10): 1402-1413.
Barclay, P., and R. Willer. 2007. “Partner Choice Creates
Competitive Altruism in Humans.” Proceedings of the Royal Society
of London B: Biological Sciences, 274 (1610): 749-753, p. 752.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
103. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Including small hints of
philanthropic tendencies in
descriptions of potential
dates increased
women’s ratings
of the described
men’s desirability
for friendship or
long-term
relationships
Barclay, P., and R. Willer. 2007.
“Partner Choice Creates
Competitive Altruism in Humans.”
Proceedings of the Royal
Society of London B: Biological
Sciences, 274 (1610): 749-
753.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Friend/Family
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
104. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Correspondingly, men
contribute more to
charity when observed
by a woman rather
than a man
Iredale, W., M. Van Vugt, and R. Dunbar. 2008. “Showing
Off in Humans: Male Generosity as a Mating Signal.”
Evolutionary Psychology, 6 (3): 386-392.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
DirectIf
seen
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Friend/Family
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
105. If
seen
1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Compatible publicity
• Requesting or even desiring
publicity appears self-interested
and anti-heroic
• Re-framing publicity as a means to
influence others to give (a second,
sacrificial gift by allowing
undesired publicity to spur
additional gifts)
• Publicize automatically (“opt out”)
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
106. Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
No/low quality ask +
no relationship
no gifts
Using natural philanthropy to understand the
origins of a quality relationship
Quality ask + no/low
quality relationship
minor gifts
No/low quality ask +
quality relationship
minor gifts
Quality ask +
quality relationship
major gifts
107. Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Understanding the gift
as a demonstration of
friendship insurance
reliability, i.e., the ability
and willingness to
protect my in-group
members and values
Understanding the
relationship as an
expectation of
friendship insurance
reliability, transactionally
unjustified support
when needed
108. In a natural context, mutual “friendship insurance” generating
transactionally unjustified support in a crisis is more important
to survival than simple exchange transactions
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
109. Make the charity like family
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
110. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity
like family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Philanthropy uses family bonding mechanisms
• Charitable giving is rewarding
(like receiving money)
• But uniquely involves
oxytocin-rich social
attachment brain regions
(used in maternal and
romantic love)
“donating to societal causes recruited two types of reward systems: the VTA–
striatum mesolimbic network, which also was involved in pure monetary
rewards, and the subgenual area, which was specific for donations and plays
key roles in social attachment and affiliative reward mechanisms in humans
and other animals.” Moll, et al (2006) PNAS 103(42), p. 156234.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
111. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity
like family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Injecting oxytocin
– a family bonding hormone –
increased giving
Zak, P. J., Stanton, A. A., & Ahmadi, S. (2007). Oxytocin
increases generosity in humans. PLoS ONE, 11, e1128
Philanthropy uses family bonding
mechanisms
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
112. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity
like family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Human touch, when
followed by a small gift,
elevated oxytocin levels
AND subsequent charitable
giving
Morhenn, V. B., Park, J. W., Piper, E., Zak, P. J. (2008). Monetary
sacrifice among strangers is mediated by endogenous oxytocin release
after physical contact. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29, 375-383.
Philanthropy uses family
bonding mechanisms
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
113. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity
like family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Build family-social relationships,
not market-contract relationships
Do you call?
Do you write?
Do you visit?
Are you closer to extended
family members who do
these things?
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
114. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity
like family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
One study found that a
distinguishing characteristic
of successful fundraisers is
that they tend to excel at
friendship-related skills such
as emotional intelligence or
memory for personal details
Pudelek, J. 2014. “Eleven Characteristics of Successful Fundraisers Revealed
at IoF National Convention.” July 10.
http://www.civilsociety.co.uk/fundraising/news/content/17819/eleven_chara
cteristics_of_successful_fundraisers_revealed_at_iof_national_convention
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
115. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity
like family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Projecting unconditional (not transactional)
social support
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
116. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity
like family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Projecting unconditional (not transactional)
social support
• Empathetic and engaged listening
• Demonstrating empathy during a crisis
• Providing a small gift reflecting a deep
understanding of the donor’s preferences
• Advising against interest
• Expressing gratitude for the relationship
• Non-ask social engagements
• Identifying personal similarities
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
117. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity
like family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Projecting purely transactional relationship
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
118. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity
like family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Projecting purely transactional relationship
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
• Using formal/ technical/contract words not
“family” words
• Meetings are only about the donor’s money
not the donor’s life story
• “Always be closing” and never advising
against interest
• Talking only about my “product” not
compassionate listening
119. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity
like family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
Market
Frame
transaction
I engage in
transactions by
formal contract
Social
Frame
relationship
I help people
because of who I
am
Use
family
language
Stories
and
simple
words
Avoid
market
language
Formal,
legal, or
contract
terms
120. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity
like family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
Make a gift
and in exchange receive a
guaranteed lifetime
income from the charity.
and in exchange receive a
guaranteed lifetime
income from the charity.
Enter into a contract with a
charity where you transfer
your cash or property
121. 13%
44% 44%
29%
48%
23%
Interested now Not now, but in
future
Will never be
interested
Contract
Gift Makeagiftand in exchange receive a
guaranteed lifetime income from the charity
receive a guaranteed lifetime income from the charity
Enterintoacontractwithacharitywhereyou
transferyourcashorpropertyand in exchange
2014 Survey (A/B)
1,101 Respondents
122. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity
like family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
If a university
violates
friendship
expectations,
such as by
refusing to admit
the donor’s child,
donations cease
Meer, J. and Rosen, H.S. (2009) Altruism and the
Child Cycle of Alumni Donations. American
Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 1(1): 258-286.
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
123. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity
like family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Encouraging interaction and support among donors
builds a community analogous to an extended family
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
124. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity
like family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
The nonprofit can foster the
development of powerful and
supportive friends from other wealthy
benefactors who share common
values and support common
beneficiaries
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
125. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity
like family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
“Honor a family member by making a
tribute gift to charity in my will”
• Increased interest in gift for many,
especially if first asked about family
members who care about the cause
• In an fMRI study also increased
memory and emotion engaged in
the charitable bequest decision
James, R. N., III (2015). The family tribute in charitable bequest giving: An experimental test of the effect of reminders on giving
intentions. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 26(1), 73-89.
Charity that represents a loved one:
The power of family tribute bequests
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
126. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Framing and
context
changes
perception of
cost
Tangibility
of Impact
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Behavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
127. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Asking for the same
gift from assets
(where it constitutes
a tiny share) rather
than from income
(where it constitutes
a much larger share)
can reduce the
perceived cost
Tangibility
of Impact
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Behavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
128. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Tangibility
of Impact
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Behavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
Wealth is not
held in cash.
It is held in
noncash assets.
If you are asking from the cash bucket, you are asking
from the small bucket
129. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity
like family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Direct
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
Ask for gifts of wealth, not disposable income
97%-99%
1%-3%
Financial assets held by families (U.S. Census 2017)
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/demo/tables/wealth/2013/wealth-asset-ownership/wealth-tables-2013.xlsx
Other financial assets
(stocks, bonds, retirement
accounts, life insurance,
mutual funds)
Cash: Checking, savings,
money market deposit
accounts, and similar
130. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Asset gifts remind us of our wealth
Morewedge, C. K.,
Holtzman, L., &
Epley, N. (2007).
Unfixed resources:
Perceived costs,
consumption, and
the accessible
account
effect. Journal of
Consumer
Research, 34(4),
459-467.
What’s in your
wallet/purse? Cash?
Credit cards? …
Do you own stocks?
Bonds? Certificates
of deposit?...
Spent
36% more
Tangibility
of Impact
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Behavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
131. 1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
People who feel wealthy act charitably
The strongest predictor of
donations is subjective
feelings about one’s wealth,
not it’s objective adequacy.
Making college students feel
richer by having them report their
savings on a scale ranging from $0
to $500 rather than $0 to $50,000
increased subsequent donations.
Wiepking, P., & Breeze, B.
(2012). Feeling poor, acting
stingy: The effect of money
perceptions on charitable
giving. International Journal of
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector
Marketing, 17(1), 13-24.
Herzenstein,
M., & Small,
D. (2012).
Donating in
recessionary
times:
Resource
scarcity,
social
distance, and
charitable
giving. ACR
North
American
Advances.
Tangibility
of Impact
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Behavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
132. Tangibility
of Impact
1. Advance the
donor hero
story
2. Make the
charity like
family
3. Provide
compatible
publicity
4. Minimize
perceived
loss
5. Manage
decision
avoidance
Windfalls promote giving
(1) Irregular
(2) Unearned
(3) Gains
Konow, J. (2010). Mixed feelings: Theories of and evidence on giving. Journal of Public Economics, 94(3-4), 279-297.; O’Curry, S. (1999). Consumer budgeting and mental accounting. In P.E. Earl &
S. Kemp (Eds.) The Elger companion to consumer research and economic psychology. Northhampton, MA: Cheltenham.; Reinstein, D. & Riener, G. (2012) Decomposing desert and tangibility
effects in a charitable giving experiment. Experimental Economics, 15(1): 229-240.; Sussman, A. B., Sharma, E., & Alter, A. L. (2015). Framing charitable donations as exceptional expenses
increases giving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 21(2), 130. Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D., (1991) Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model. The Quarterly
Journal of Economics, 106 (4): 1039-1061.
Framing a gift as an exceptional event removes
it from comparison with regular budget items
Giving part of a gain is easier than taking a loss
It is easier to give
“Appreciated Investments”
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
Behavioraleconomics
Relativev.Absolute
Elephantv.Rider
Storyv.Data
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income
133. 5-year average growth in total fundraising
NONPROFITS
receiving
ONLY
CASH
gifts
2,548 nonprofits raising $1MM+
in 2010 reported only cash gifts
in 2010 & 2015 on e-file IRS-990
GROWTH
NONPROFITS
receiving
ANY
NONCASH
gifts
4,236 nonprofits raising $1MM+ in
2010 reported noncash gifts in 2010
& 2015 on e-file IRS-990
GROWTH
NONPROFITS
receiving
SECURITIES
NONCASH
gifts
2,143 nonprofits raising $1MM+
in 2010 reported securities gifts in
2010 & 2015 on e-file IRS-990
GROWTH
(2010 to 2015)
134. NONPROFITS
receiving
ONLY
CASH
gifts
2,548 nonprofits raising $1MM+
in 2010 reported only cash gifts
in 2010 & 2015 on e-file IRS-990
11%
GROWTH
NONPROFITS
receiving
ANY
NONCASH
gifts
4,236 nonprofits raising $1MM+ in
2010 reported noncash gifts in 2010
& 2015 on e-file IRS-990
50%
GROWTH
NONPROFITS
receiving
SECURITIES
NONCASH
gifts
2,143 nonprofits raising $1MM+
in 2010 reported securities gifts in
2010 & 2015 on e-file IRS-990
66%
GROWTH
(2010 to 2015)
5-year average growth in total fundraising
135. 3-year average growth in total fundraising
NONPROFITS
receiving
ONLY
CASH
Average Total
Fundraising
Years Growth
‘10-‘13 = 5%
‘11-‘14 = 1%
‘12-‘15 = 2%
‘13-‘16 = 0%
NONPROFITS
receiving
ANY
NONCASH
Average Total
Fundraising
Years Growth
‘10-‘13 = 34%
‘11-‘14 = 30%
‘12-‘15 = 30%
‘13-‘16 = 25%
NONPROFITS
receiving
SECURITIES
NONCASH
Average Total
Fundraising
Years Growth
‘10-‘13 = 44%
‘11-‘14 = 42%
‘12-‘15 = 39%
‘13-‘16 = 33%
(2010 to 2013; 2011 to 2014; 2012 to 2015; 2013 to 2016)
136. $100K to
<$500K
$500K to
<$1MM
$1MM to
<$2MM
$2MM to
<$3MM
$3MM to
<$5MM
$5MM to
<$10MM $10MM+
Nonprofits reporting
only cashcontributions in 2010 & 2015
on e-IRS 990s
56%
[n=9168]
25%
[n=2397]
14%
[n=1343]
18%
[n=478]
0%
[n=358]
0%
[n=223]
26%
[n=146]
Nonprofits reporting
any noncashcontributions in 2010 & 2015
on e-IRS 990s
137%
[n=2278]
71%
[n=1373]
60%
[n=1215]
58%
[n=652]
48%
[n=728]
36%
[n=679]
35%
[n=962]
Nonprofits reporting
securitiescontributions in 2010 & 2015
on e-IRS 990s
400%
[n=114]
176%
[n=187]
103%
[n=340]
94%
[n=284]
68%
[n=385]
50%
[n=427]
43%
[n=707]
5-year total fundraising growth
by initial level of total contributions
137. What happens IN THE SAME YEAR
when gifts shift from cash to assets?
Fixed effects regression analysis of the 761,876 e-filed IRS Form 990s reporting
positive contribution amounts from 205,696 organizations in 2010-2016.
When
share from
SECURITIES
GROWS
by +10%
total
contributions
grow by
+18%
When
share from
REAL ESTATE
GROWS
by +10%
total
contributions
grow by
+26%
When share
from
CASH
GROWS
by +10%
total
contributions
fall by
-13%
138. What happens IN THE SAME YEAR when gifts shift
from cash to assets at
large, $50MM+, fundraising NPOs?
Fixed effects regression analysis of the 2,566 e-filed IRS Form 990s reporting contribution
amounts of $50MM+ from 723 organizations in 2010-2016.
When
share from
SECURITIES
GROWS
by +10%
total
contributions
grow by
+28%
When
share from
REAL ESTATE
GROWS
by +10%
total
contributions
grow by
+13%
When share
from
CASH
GROWS
by +10%
total
contributions
fall by
-6%
139. What happens IN THE SAME YEAR when gifts shift
from cash to assets at
large, $500MM+, fundraising NPOs?
Fixed effects regression analysis of the 142 e-filed IRS Form 990s reporting contribution
amounts of $500MM+ from 46 organizations in 2010-2016.
When
share from
SECURITIES
GROWS
by +10%
total
contributions
grow by
+13%
When
share from
REAL ESTATE
GROWS
by +10%
total
contributions
grow by
+4%
When share
from
CASH
GROWS
by +10%
total
contributions
fall by
-14%
140. What happens IN THE SAME YEAR when gifts shift
from cash to assets at
Colleges & Universities?
Fixed effects regression analysis of the 20,447 e-filed IRS Form 990s reporting contribution
amounts of $500MM+ from 4,361 organizations in 2010-2016.
When
share from
SECURITIES
GROWS
by +10%
total
contributions
grow by
+10%
When
share from
REAL ESTATE
GROWS
by +10%
total
contributions
grow by
+18%
When share
from
CASH
GROWS
by +10%
total
contributions
fall by
-9%
141. Gifts from larger asset types have
more impact
Same year effect of a 10% ratio shift (asset type/total giving)
for nonprofits already reporting substantial noncash gifts
Doesn't help none/minimal Books, Food, Collectibles,
Uncategorized
Helps a little +2% to +3% Cars, Boats, Household goods,
Art, Drugs
Definitely
helps +7% Publicly-traded securities,
Historical art & artifacts
Helps a lot +14% to +18% Real estate,
Non-publicly-traded securities
143. Donor Nonprofit
Donor Nonprofit
+
Avoid capital gains
($90,000 x 23.8%)
$21,240fed
($90,000 x 13.3%)
–($90,000 x 5.27%)
$7,227state
Income tax deduct.
($100,000 x 39.6%)
$39,600fed
($100,000 x 13.3%)
–($100,000 x 5.27%)
$8,030state
Income tax deduct.
($100,000 x 37%)
$37,000fed
($100,000 x 13.3%)
–($100,000 x 5.27%)
$13,300 state
+
Avoid capital gains
($90,000 x 23.8%)
$21,240fed
($90,000 x 13.3%)
–($90,000 x 5.27%)
$11,970state
Asset gifts just got EVEN cheaper for many
2017 2018
Net cost $16,490 in ‘18 vs. $23,903 in ‘17
$100k Cash
$100k Stock
Net cost $52,370 in ‘18 vs. $49,700 in ‘17
144. Donor
Nonprofit
$100K old stock
(low basis)
immediately buy
identical stock
(100% basis)
No need to change your portfolio!
The Charitable Swap
No “wash sale” rule
because this is gain
property, not loss
property
$100K
cash
145. Natural Philanthropy
How the
natural
origins of
donor
motivations
drive
powerful
fundraising
Professor Russell James III
Texas Tech University
peer-reviewed academic journal article available at
https://www.nature.com/articles/palcomms201750
Possessions
Altruism
Reciprocity
Tangibility
of Impact
If
seen
Avoid
Yes
No
Direct
Code
Transactional
Friend/Family
Wealth
Income
Givingdependsupon
thetangibilityofa
gift’simpactonaltruism
(directorcode),reciprocity
(transactionalorfriendship),
andpossessionsrelativeto
itsalternatives
James III, R. N.
(2017). Natural
philanthropy.
Palgrave
Communications,
3, 17050, 1-12
Applying
Natural
Philanthropy
Better Asks:
Gifts that
advance the
donor hero story
Better
Relationships:
Make the charity
like family
(relational vs.
transactional)
Bigger Asks:
Gifts of wealth,
not disposable
income